ArticleHeart rhythm O22025
Risk stratification of major arrhythmia events in Japanese patients with Brugada syndrome using machine learning models.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improving arrhythmic risk prediction using cardiac magnetic resonance within deep learning in ischemic heart disease.NPJ cardiovascular health · 2026Article
- Beyond the type 1 pattern: comprehensive risk stratification in Brugada syndrome.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Brugada syndrome (BrS) has been known to cause fatal arrhythmias, and an effective risk stratification method should be developed. Objective: This study aimed to construct a risk prediction model for BrS using machine learning models. Methods: We enrolled 234 Japanese patients with BrS and analyzed the clinical information including the age, gender, history of syncope, family history of BrS or sudden cardiac death, PR interval in lead Ⅱ, QRS duration in V6, RR interval in V1, r-J interval in V1, T-peak-to-T-end interval, max QTc, fragmented QRS, Type-1 in peripheral leads, spontaneous type 1 pattern, aVR sign, presence of early repolarization (ER), and presence of ER in the peripheral leads. We validated the previous stratification method (BRUGADA-RISK and Predicting Arrhythmic evenT [PAT] scores). Next, we constructed 3 machine learning models (logistic regression, support vector machine [SVM], and random forest). To detect the important clinical features, we used SHapely additive exPlanations and constructed a low-dimensional model. Results: The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.57 for the BRUGADA-RISK score and 0.59 for the PAT score. The SVM revealed the highest AUCs. Moreover, the low-dimension model with the SVM (r-J interval in V1, history of syncope, fragmented QRS, presence of ER, T-peak-to-T-end interval, QRS duration in V6, and age) exhibited a higher AUC than the SVM model using all clinical features (mean AUC, 0.77; 95% confidence interval [0.64-0.89], Welch's T-test Conclusion: The machine learning model could be useful for stratifying major arrhythmic events in BrS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.